Virtual teams have been defined as "the 21st century's version of
traditional teams. 1]

"…studies indicate that virtual teams (teams in which
most members cannot regularly meet face-to-face) embrace technology quickly
and use it to disseminate information more efficiently than traditional teams." 2]

TechnoTeams has listed the benefits of virtual teams. I have taken the liberty of summarizing
their three-page list of benefits. 3]

Improved Decision-Making: Virtual teams become adept at moving
information quickly, and at making it available for the entire team or entire organization.
This efficient flow of information facilitates better and faster decision processes.

Ideal Matching of Personnel & Task (without concern for location):
By removing location as a component
of team selection, virtual teams can assemble the organization's overall
best possible mix of knowledge and skills. Talent dispersed throughout a
global company can be used efficiently without constant travel or relocation
(which sometimes drives talented employees away.) This is a considerable
benefit and often the point that pushes companies to start using virtual
teams. Take Lockheed Martin for example. "Having the wrong skills in
the wrong place most of the time was what drove us to think about virtual
teams," says Joe Cleveland, president of Lockheed Martin Enterprise
Information Systems (as quoted in Melymuka, p.70 (3).

Fewer Face-to-Face Meetings: Since
virtual teams can converse and share information easily through the use of
technology, the need for face-to-face meetings is greatly reduced. The reduction
in meetings also results in a reduction in time lost due to travel and the
disruption of being out of the office. Opper & Fersko-Weiss estimate one
in three meetings can be eliminated in this manner (Opper & Fersko-Weiss,
p.45). In the future, face-to-face meetings may be eliminated all together
as cutting edge technology helps virtual teams feel like they are meeting in
person. For example, NCR has employed a high-speed, full bandwidth continuously
available audio/video/data link that they affectionately nicknamed "the
Worm Hole" (a reference to Start Trek) (Lipnack & Stamps, p.78). Engineers
positioned the cameras and tables in the meeting rooms to create the illusion
of everyone sitting at one table. However, because technologies like this are
very expensive to develop and to maintain, they are currently only a possibility
for large companies with deep pockets.

Verifone

Verifone is owned by Hewlett-Packard, and produces low-cost
equipment for credit card and cheque authorization. Verifone\u2019s employees
are scattered all over the world, with less than 7% located at the tiny corporate
headquarters in California. All employees are linked electronically and are
able to share in major decision. Verifone's transnational infrastructure
juxtaposes efficiency, responsiveness, and learning.

Eastman Kodak

A virtual team was used to develop a single-use camera for the
European market. Though the camera's features were similar to those on
the market elsewhere in the world, Kodak wanted to adapt the camera's features
so that it would appeal to European buyers. German engineers worked with the
design teams, first in New York, and later through telecommunications links
from Europe. By creating a virtual team that allowed input from people across
the world, Kodak was able to quickly respond to a local market opening.

Benefits not withstanding, there are, in my opinion, serious problems associated with virtual teams.
The Stanford Graduates School of Business has indicated:

…Virtual teams may extract an unexpected price: People who
add their hard-won knowledge to a common pool may became alienated from the
organization and even fear that they are sowing the seed for their own replacement.

After all, says Stanford's Margaret Neale, if your knowledge
- not to mention the tricks and tips it has taken years to learn - is deposited
in a database for all to access, does the organization still need you? "It's
a real fear," says Neale. "Technology has the potential to destabilize
the relationship between organization and employees."

Also a serious concern: Employees working in virtual teams are,
to a certain extent, isolated from their colleagues. Although they may have
contact with other employees of their organization, they don't spend much
time with them. In this situation, the virtual worker loses opportunity to
learn from his or her closest colleagues. In effect, there's a double
penalty. The virtual worker perceives herself as giving away her knowledge
but not having the chance to "replenish her own reservoir of knowledge,"
and thus feels even more vulnerable, says Neale. 4]

In my opinion, in a period of down-sizing, employees are reluctant to share knowledge.
This is true whether virtual teams are or are not in place.

Consider the following scenario: Jones or Smith are to be downsized:
Jones has general skills and knowledge. Smith has more specific skills and
to some extent is the sole repository of the above knowledge. All things considered,
Jones is the more vulnerable employee. It seems to me, that Stanford's
Margaret Neale has identified a serious problem associated with virtual teams.